Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DIVA as the Catalyst for Design:
MIT Advanced Daylighting Project
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE IN DESIGN II
Madeline [email protected]
Catherine De [email protected]
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DIVA as a Design Tool for a Small Architecture Office in Boston
1 CONTEXT
Project Parameters and Initial Energy Models
2 STATIC SHADING
From Viper/Shaderade to DIVA
3 DYNAMIC SHADING
Daylight Autonomy, Glare, and View
4 ELECTRIC LIGHTING and ENERGY USE
Luminaire and Thermal Analysis
5 PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Shade Modification and Visualizations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
CONTEXT – West Facade
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
CONTEXT – West Façade Static Shading Design
Solar Analysis with Ladybug Sunpath Diagrams
March 21 November 21June 21
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
CONTEXT – West Façade Static Shading Design
Solar Analysis with DIVA Visualizations
March 21 November 21June 21
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN – Energy Analysis with Viper and Shaderade
Effect of Simple Horizontal and Vertical Shading Planes
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN – Energy Analysis with Viper and Shaderade
Analysis of Perpendicular Planes – Exterior/Interior begin to influence each other.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN – DIVA Daylighting Analysis and Design
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
VIPER DIVA Materials and Energy Analysis
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN – DIVA Analysis to Design Interior Conditions
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
POINT IN TIME ILLUMINANCE – Effects of Materials in Best/Worst Cases
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
POINT IN TIME ILLUMINANCE – Effects of Materials in Best/Worst Cases
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
POINT IN TIME ILLUMINANCE – Effects of Materials in Best/Worst Cases
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DAYLIGHT AUTONOMY– Effects of Materials and Interior Conditions
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DAYLIGHT AUTONOMY– Effects of Materials and Interior Conditions
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DAYLIGHT AUTONOMY– Effects of Materials and Interior Conditions
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DAYLIGHT AUTONOMY vs ENERGY USE
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN – Energy Analysis with Viper and Shaderade
DIVA Visualizations to Check for Direct Light
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN
Winter Solstice 3pm
Summer Solstice 3pm
Equinox 3pm
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
POINT IN TIME GLARE ANALYSIS
Figure 3: Point in Time Glare Analysis for Two Views on July 15 at 4pm.
The area of glare for the clerestory is small compared to the area of glare from the view window. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show a intermediate study to determine whether or not the opaque shade for the clerestory was necessary. The comparison of
falsecolor visualizations for the view facing the window point in time glare analysis for July 15th at 4pm for the base shading state as well as the dynamic shading state shows that the shade dramatically reduces the glare but does not eliminate glare from
the upper clerestory.
Annual Glare Analysis was performed before DA analysis with dynamic shading so the DGP schedules could be used from viewpoints facing the window, instead of nodes. Three views were chosen, all facing the window, and the user was allowed to
adapt by 45 degrees for glare analysis.
Figure 4: Field of View Out of Window for Users Facing Glare Source
Facing Room DGP = .25Facing Window DGP = .76
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
ANNUAL GLARE ANALYSIS
MIT 4.430 Daylighting
Madeline Gradillas, Catherine De Wolf, Brianna Coston
Assignment 8 – Glare, View and Dynamic Shading
Task 8.1 + 8.3 Dynamic Shade Design through Glare and Daylight Autonomy Analysis
Annual glare analysis from two different viewpoints, one facing the large view window and one facing away from it, shows that visual
comfort of occupants facing the window is a concern for mid to late afternoon for most of the year (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Each of
these viewpoints were simulated separately, but programmed so users could adapt their position by 45°. Point in time glare analysis
shows that the window is a source of intolerable glare for users facing the window, with the DGP registering at 76% but is
imperceptible for users facing away from the window, with a DGP of 25% (Figure 3).
Once the major source of glare was identified using point in time glare analysis, a field of view that was most susceptible to glare was
established for users facing the window and a smaller area of glare at the clerestory (Figure 4). That field of view determined the
location of the exterior dynamic shading system (Figure 5). The system required the addition of framing elements and consists of an
opaque retractable panel (50% reflectance) located just above the clerestory window so that direct light is cut off but diffuse light from
the front and sides may still enter, and a vertical opaque panel (50% reflectance) that operates to block only the lower view window
field during periods of intolerable glare (Figure 6). The panels are offset 4 inches parallel from the outer fixed panels so as not to
obstruct what little view this façade provides.
Figure 1: Annual Glare Analysis for View Facing Toward Window
Figure 2: Annual Glare Analysis for View Facing Away from Window
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
STATIC SHADING DESIGN
Physical Model and Heliodon Studies
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DYNAMIC SHADING DESIGN
Figure 5: Dynamic Shade Located in Glare Field of View
Figure 6: Exterior Renderings Showing Dynamic Shade Positions. Top: Base Shading State. Bottom: Dynamic Shading State.
Figure 3: Point in Time Glare Analysis for Two Views on July 15 at 4pm.
The area of glare for the clerestory is small compared to the area of glare from the view window. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show a intermediate study to determine whether or not the opaque shade for the clerestory was necessary. The comparison of
falsecolor visualizations for the view facing the window point in time glare analysis for July 15th at 4pm for the base shading state as well as the dynamic shading state shows that the shade dramatically reduces the glare but does not eliminate glare from
the upper clerestory.
Annual Glare Analysis was performed before DA analysis with dynamic shading so the DGP schedules could be used from viewpoints facing the window, instead of nodes. Three views were chosen, all facing the window, and the user was allowed to
adapt by 45 degrees for glare analysis.
Figure 4: Field of View Out of Window for Users Facing Glare Source
Base State
Afternoon State
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DYNAMIC SHADING DESIGN
Figure 5: Dynamic Shade Located in Glare Field of View
Figure 6: Exterior Renderings Showing Dynamic Shade Positions. Top: Base Shading State. Bottom: Dynamic Shading State.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DYNAMIC SHADING DESIGN
Figure 7: Falsecolor Image of View toward Window for July 15 at 4pm. Left: Base Shading State. Right: Dynamic Shading State.
Figure 8: Point in Time Glare Analysis for Both Views with Dynamic Shade Engaged. July 15 at 4pm.
Shade operation (Figure 9) is consistent with glare seen from the view facing the window, shown in Figure 1, where almost
every afternoon the shades are drawn. Still, even with the dynamic shade employed, some direct intolerable glare still occurs, especially in December and February (Figure 11). To cut out this glare might entail restricting the view further. The original
design intent for the diagonal clerestory shade was to reflect morning light into the clerestory, but the operation of the opaque horizontal shade precludes this from happening, so in further design iterations, this part of the static shading system could be
re-designed so a horizontal dynamic shade is not needed.
Daylight Autonomy comparisons between the base and dynamic shading states show that with manual dynamic shade
operation (Figure 9) , DA300lux[50%] remains at 82% during occupied hours, with all work stations still effectively daylit (Error! Reference source not found.). The UDI also remains nearly the same at 94%. It is interesting that no decrease in DA
occurred with the shade operation. One explanation might have to do with what happens to the clerestory when the shades are engaged. Also note: For the base shading state, the DA analysis was re-run from the previous assignment, due to slight
changes in the shade armature and interior wall configurations. The DA for the base state decreased from 86% to 82%.
Afternoon Sun with Dynamic ShadeAfternoon Sun with Static Shade
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DYNAMIC SHADING DESIGN
Figure 7: Falsecolor Image of View toward Window for July 15 at 4pm. Left: Base Shading State. Right: Dynamic Shading State.
Figure 8: Point in Time Glare Analysis for Both Views with Dynamic Shade Engaged. July 15 at 4pm.
Shade operation (Figure 9) is consistent with glare seen from the view facing the window, shown in Figure 1, where almost
every afternoon the shades are drawn. Still, even with the dynamic shade employed, some direct intolerable glare still occurs, especially in December and February (Figure 11). To cut out this glare might entail restricting the view further. The original
design intent for the diagonal clerestory shade was to reflect morning light into the clerestory, but the operation of the opaque horizontal shade precludes this from happening, so in further design iterations, this part of the static shading system could be
re-designed so a horizontal dynamic shade is not needed.
Daylight Autonomy comparisons between the base and dynamic shading states show that with manual dynamic shade
operation (Figure 9) , DA300lux[50%] remains at 82% during occupied hours, with all work stations still effectively daylit (Error! Reference source not found.). The UDI also remains nearly the same at 94%. It is interesting that no decrease in DA
occurred with the shade operation. One explanation might have to do with what happens to the clerestory when the shades are engaged. Also note: For the base shading state, the DA analysis was re-run from the previous assignment, due to slight
changes in the shade armature and interior wall configurations. The DA for the base state decreased from 86% to 82%.
Facing Window 1pm DGP = .87
Figure 9: Dynamic Shade Operation Schedule.
Figure 10: Annual Glare for Shading State 1
Figure 11: Direct Glare - December 12, 3pm
Facing Window 6pm DGP = .87
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DYNAMIC SHADING DESIGN
Figure 9: Dynamic Shade Operation Schedule.
Figure 10: Annual Glare for Shading State 1
Figure 11: Direct Glare - December 12, 3pm
Figure 9: Dynamic Shade Operation Schedule.
Figure 10: Annual Glare for Shading State 1
Figure 11: Direct Glare - December 12, 3pm
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
DYNAMIC SHADING DESIGN – Daylight Autonomy Check
Figure 12: DA Comparison between Base and Dynamic Shading States
Task 8.2 View Analysis (optional if you are so inclined)
We took a fishey HDR image (ouside.hdr) of the outside view over the Charles River in Boston as “seen” from our project.
Figure 13: outside.hdr
We also used an HDR image shown in Figure 2.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
ELECTRIC LIGHTING DESIGN – Energy Efficient Luminaire Specification
Figure 12: Lighting Fixture Plan and Luminaire Specs.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Figure 14: Falsecolor overlay of lit work surfaces.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
ELECTRIC LIGHTING DESIGN – DIVA Electric Lighting Analysis
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Final Iteration Energy Analysis – Addition of shading and lighting schedules.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Energy Analysis – Differences Between Daylight and Thermal Models
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Energy Analysis – EUI with Varying Equipment Loads
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Figure 9: Dynamic Shade Operation Schedule.
Figure 10: Annual Glare for Shading State 1
Figure 11: Direct Glare - December 12, 3pm
Figure 9: Dynamic Shade Operation Schedule.
Figure 10: Annual Glare for Shading State 1
Figure 11: Direct Glare - December 12, 3pm
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Figure 7: Falsecolor Image of View toward Window for July 15 at 4pm. Left: Base Shading State. Right: Dynamic Shading State.
Figure 8: Point in Time Glare Analysis for Both Views with Dynamic Shade Engaged. July 15 at 4pm.
Shade operation (Figure 9) is consistent with glare seen from the view facing the window, shown in Figure 1, where almost
every afternoon the shades are drawn. Still, even with the dynamic shade employed, some direct intolerable glare still occurs, especially in December and February (Figure 11). To cut out this glare might entail restricting the view further. The original
design intent for the diagonal clerestory shade was to reflect morning light into the clerestory, but the operation of the opaque horizontal shade precludes this from happening, so in further design iterations, this part of the static shading system could be
re-designed so a horizontal dynamic shade is not needed.
Daylight Autonomy comparisons between the base and dynamic shading states show that with manual dynamic shade
operation (Figure 9) , DA300lux[50%] remains at 82% during occupied hours, with all work stations still effectively daylit (Error! Reference source not found.). The UDI also remains nearly the same at 94%. It is interesting that no decrease in DA
occurred with the shade operation. One explanation might have to do with what happens to the clerestory when the shades are engaged. Also note: For the base shading state, the DA analysis was re-run from the previous assignment, due to slight
changes in the shade armature and interior wall configurations. The DA for the base state decreased from 86% to 82%.
Facing Window 1pm DGP = .87
Figure 9: Dynamic Shade Operation Schedule.
Figure 10: Annual Glare for Shading State 1
Figure 11: Direct Glare - December 12, 3pm
Facing Window 6pm DGP = .87
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT – Glare and View
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
During the morning shades are open to the view.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
During the morning shades are open to the view.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
In the afternoon shades fully close to block all direct light
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
In the afternoon shades fully close to block all direct light
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
In the evening shades block low sun but allow for some view.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
In the evening shades block low sun but allow for some view.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4.430 | Professor Christoph Reinhart
DIVA DAY 2015
London_October 23, 2015
Questions?Thank you
Madeline [email protected]
